By Gopal Ram Tripathi
The Bombay High Court has struck down a year-long externment order against a political activist, dropped a harsh criticism on the Mumbai Police for treating peaceful protest as grounds for expulsion.
Justice Madhav J. Jamdar, presiding over a single-judge bench, set aside the order that had barred Saeed Ahmad Abdul Wahid Chaudhary, state general secretary of the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI), from entering Mumbai and neighbouring districts for a year. Police had cited his role in organising demonstrations against the Citizenship Act amendments and the Gyanwapi mosque dispute as the basis for the ban, imposed by the deputy commissioner of police on December 3, 2025, and later upheld by the Konkan Range divisional commissioner.
The question arises whether the citizens are being made into slaves or not. During the hearing, Justice Jamdar did not mince words, asking pointedly whether the police were reducing citizens to servitude simply for disagreeing with the government. He reminded the force that its duty is to the public, not to political leadership, and made clear that slogans critical of the ruling party and its leaders, including chants against the BJP government and Union Home Minister Amit Shah, fall squarely within citizens' right to dissent.
Constitution was kept on the ground where in his written order, the judge dismissed the externment as an act of bad faith, noting that organising marches and sit-ins against government decisions cannot, by itself, justify banishment under the Maharashtra Police Act. He grounded the ruling in Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution, which protect free expression and the right to a dignified life, warning that punishing peaceful dissent would set a troubling precedent.
The state had defended the ban by pointing out that the protests went ahead despite police denying permission for them, arguing this justified the crackdown. The court was unconvinced, holding that the activist's speeches and the resulting crowds while they caused some traffic disruption, did not amount to the kind of threat to public order that externment law was designed to address.
Maharashtra Politics had a melt of heart. Justice Jamdar also had a lighter aside for Chaudhary, suggesting, given the political defections underway in Maharashtra, including Shiv Sena (UBT) MPs crossing over to the Eknath Shinde-led faction, that he too might consider switching sides to see his pending FIRs cleared up. The judge additionally indicated he would consider imposing costs on the police officers responsible for the externment order.
The ruling comes as a reminder that externment, a colonial-era policing tool meant to address genuine threats to public order, cannot be repurposed to silence political opposition or protest. By anchoring his decision in fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution, Justice Jamdar has reinforced that dissent against government policy, however vocal, is not by itself a law-and-order problem. The order is likely to be closely watched by activists and civil liberties groups who have long flagged the use of externment and preventive-detention laws against protesters and political dissidents across the country.
Suggested Reading:
Subscribe to our channels on YouTube and WhatsApp
Download our app on Play Store